Search

Intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) is a common cause of stroke. Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay for symptomatic ICAD treatment. Endovascular management with submaximal angioplasty and/or intracranial stenting is reserved for patients with repeated ischemic events despite optimal medical therapy. We demonstrate intracranial angioplasty and stenting technique, technique indications, and sizing of stent and target vessel diameter. Stenting and angioplasty have been described in the Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis and Wingspan Stent System Post Market Surveillance trials.1,2 Submaximal angioplasty has also been described.3 This patient, who had been on dual antiplatelet therapy for several months, initially presented with occlusion of the left middle cerebral artery M2 inferior division and underwent mechanical thrombectomy with successful reperfusion. Postoperatively, the patient's symptoms did not improve. Medical management was optimized with heparin infusion. However, repeat stroke study demonstrated M2 inferior division reocclusion. A decision was made to proceed with intracranial angioplasty and stenting. P2Y12 levels were therapeutic. Under moderate conscious sedation, submaximal angioplasty of up to 80% of the normal M2 caliber was attempted. However, we observed persistent high-grade stenosis of the M2 inferior division. The major risk of crossing the lesion for angioplasty is vessel perforation. To safely perform this maneuver, we used a J-configured Synchro-2 microwire (Stryker). Because of the patient's recent thrombectomy, we also had prior tactile feedback about how much resistance was encountered while crossing the occlusion. We then deployed a balloon-mounted intracranial stent for optimal radial force across the stenotic area to restore perfusion. Postoperative computed tomography perfusion showed resolution of the previously noticed perfusion deficit. The patient gave informed consent for the procedures and video recording. Institutional review board approval was deemed unnecessary. Video. ©University at Buffalo Neurosurgery, September 2020. With permission., (© Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2021.)

Objectives: Cost-effectiveness of endovascular therapy (EVT) is a key consideration for broad use of this approach for emergent large vessel occlusion stroke. We evaluated the evidence on cost-effectiveness of EVT in comparison with best medical management from a global perspective., Materials and Methods: This systematic review of studies published between January 2010 and May 2020 evaluated the cost effectiveness of EVT for patients with large vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke. The gain in quality adjusted life year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per QALY resulting from EVT, were recorded. The study setting (country, economic perspective), decision model, and data sources used in economic models of EVT cost-effectiveness were recorded., Results: Twenty-five original studies from 12 different countries were included in our review. Five of these studies were reported from a societal perspective; 18 were reported from a healthcare system perspective. Two studies used real-world data. The time horizon varied from 1 year to a lifetime; however, 18 studies reported a time horizon of >10 years. Twenty studies reported using outcome data from randomized, controlled clinical trials for their models. Nineteen studies reported using a Markov model. Incremental QALYs ranged from 0.09-3.5. All studies but 1 reported that EVT was cost-effective., Conclusions: Evidence from different countries and economic perspectives suggests that EVT for stroke treatment is cost-effective. Most cost-effectiveness studies are based on outcome data from randomized clinical trials. However, there is a need to study the cost-effectiveness of EVT based solely on real-world outcome data., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neuroendovascular intervention has become a key treatment option for acute ischemic stroke. The Sofia (6F) PLUS catheter was designed for neurovascular access for diagnostic or therapeutic interventions., Objective: To report the first series describing use of the Sofia PLUS intermediate/distal access reperfusion catheter in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke., Methods: In this retrospective study, 41 stroke cases were identified in which the catheter was utilized for thrombolysis/thrombectomy. Mean preprocedure National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 16.5 ± 5.2 (range 4-29). Occluded vessels included the M1 segment, M2 segment, internal carotid artery terminus, cervical internal carotid artery, and basilar artery., Results: Successful positioning of the Sofia PLUS catheter near the occlusion site was achieved in 38 (92.7%) of 41 cases in which thrombectomy or thrombolysis was attempted using intraarterial tissue plasminogen activator, a direct aspiration first-pass technique, and/or stent retrieval. A postprocedure thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) score of 2b/3 was achieved in 37 of 41 cases. Of 15 cases where the Sofia PLUS was used for a direct aspiration first-pass technique, TICI 2b/3 was achieved in 11 (73.3%). In one case where intra-arterial tissue plasminogen activator was used as the only treatment modality, TICI 2a was achieved. No device-related or catheter-related complications were observed. The mean 7-d-postprocedure National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score among the 39 survivors was 8.5 ± 7.3 (range 0-23)., Conclusion: Initial results with use of the Sofia (6F) PLUS for endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke have been encouraging. Experience with a larger series is warranted to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of this device and compare it with other reperfusion catheters., (Copyright © 2017 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons)

OBJECT In this study, the authors used information provided in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to study the impact of transferring stroke patients from one facility to a center where they received some form of active stroke intervention (intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, thrombectomy, or a combination of both therapies). METHODS Patient demographic characteristics and hospital factors obtained from the 2008-2010 acute stroke NIS data were analyzed. Discharge disposition, hospitalization cost, and mortality were the dependent variables studied. Univariate analysis and multivariate binary logistic regression analysis were performed. Data analysis focused on the cohort of acute stroke patients who received some form of active intervention (55,913 of 1,311,511 patients in the NIS). RESULTS When overall outcome was considered, transferred patients had a significantly higher number of other-than-routine (OTR, i.e., other than discharge to home without home health care) discharge dispositions (p < 0.0001). In multivariate regression analysis including pertinent patient and hospital factors, transfer-in patients had significantly worse OTR discharge disposition (p < 0.0001, odds ratio [OR] 2.575, 95% CI 2.341-2.832). Mean hospitalization cost including an intervention was $70,325.11 for direct admissions and $97,546.92 for transferred patients. Transfer from another facility (p < 0.001, OR 1.677, 95% CI 1.548-1.817) was associated with higher hospitalization cost. CONCLUSIONS The study showed that hospital cost for acute stroke intervention is significantly higher for a transferred patient than for a direct admission. Moreover, the frequency of OTR discharge was significantly higher among transferred patients than direct admissions. Future strategies should focus on ways and means of transporting patients appropriately and directly to stroke centers.

Background and Purpose: Patients with posterior circulation strokes have been excluded from recent randomized endovascular stroke trials. We reviewed the recent multicenter experience with endovascular treatment of posterior circulation strokes to identify the clinical, radiographic, and procedural predictors of successful recanalization and good neurological outcomes., Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with posterior circulation strokes, who underwent thrombectomy with stent retrievers or primary aspiration thrombectomy (including A Direct Aspiration First Pass Technique [ADAPT] approach). We correlated clinical and radiographic outcomes with demographic, clinical, and technical characteristics., Results: A total of 100 patients were included in the final analysis (mean age, 63.5±14.2 years; mean admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 19.2±8.2). Favorable clinical outcome at 3 months (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2) was achieved in 35% of patients. Successful recanalization and shorter time from stroke onset to the start of the procedure were significant predictors of favorable clinical outcome at 90 days. Stent retriever and aspiration thrombectomy as primary treatment approaches showed comparable procedural and clinical outcomes. None of the baseline advanced imaging modalities (magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomographic perfusion, or computed tomography angiography assessment of collaterals) showed superiority in selecting patients for thrombectomy., Conclusions: Time to the start of the procedure is an important predictor of clinical success after thrombectomy in patients with posterior circulation strokes. Both stent retriever and aspiration thrombectomy as primary treatment approaches are effective in achieving successful recanalization., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)